This piece is good in how it identifies the contradictory nature of online rationalists against SJWs while the rationalists try to preserve their own 'safe space' and it is good in noting the hypocrisy of aggressive organized attacks on the press while defending their own self-publishing.
I wish it did better at understanding and digging into the rationalist movement, not because it is incorrect, but because it is somewhat overly broad. And because there is so much more going on. It makes the classic mistake of looking at a social movement (which I would say 'rationalism' or even the specific form from SSC which is 'Less Wrong' would fall under) and tying it to a few individuals rather than the broader movements and the way the community works. I think if they had it might have been an even worse look for the SSC community tbh, but I also think it would have been needed.
I also wish they could have dove a little more into the research and experts that show the actual numbers and facts behind concerns around giving air to extremists, of which there are many, and highlighting how the complex research in this area should have been more than enough to convince someone who calls themselves 'rational'.
Also, getting into 'effective altruism' and the communities weird views on AI and how those mix is like... a whole book worth of weird shit, I wish this article had either given more words to talk to it or left it out entirely, but I will say it did as decently there as it could with the word limit.
I also think the essential companion piece for this is: https://mynewbandis.substack.com/p/slate-star-clusterfuck
This piece is good in how it identifies the contradictory nature of online rationalists against SJWs while the rationalists try to preserve their own 'safe space' and it is good in noting the hypocrisy of aggressive organized attacks on the press while defending their own self-publishing.
I wish it did better at understanding and digging into the rationalist movement, not because it is incorrect, but because it is somewhat overly broad. And because there is so much more going on. It makes the classic mistake of looking at a social movement (which I would say 'rationalism' or even the specific form from SSC which is 'Less Wrong' would fall under) and tying it to a few individuals rather than the broader movements and the way the community works. I think if they had it might have been an even worse look for the SSC community tbh, but I also think it would have been needed.
I also wish they could have dove a little more into the research and experts that show the actual numbers and facts behind concerns around giving air to extremists, of which there are many, and highlighting how the complex research in this area should have been more than enough to convince someone who calls themselves 'rational'.
Also, getting into 'effective altruism' and the communities weird views on AI and how those mix is like... a whole book worth of weird shit, I wish this article had either given more words to talk to it or left it out entirely, but I will say it did as decently there as it could with the word limit.